by Karla » February 24th, 2006, 12:31 pm
I love reading the OT. I love preaching from it. People in those days were just learning to know God. There experience is raw and visceral. God was a part of their lives in a way we can't really understand. It wasn't an intellectual exercise. They saw God in the daily living of their lives. Was there a storm? --What did God mean by that? Got a boil? --What is God telling you? War with the Ammorites? Bloody slaughter? --What is God saying to us? God was in the smoky pillar, the burning bush, the bleating of the sacrifice. God was in the wind and the sand and the holy mountain.
But there is no "God of the Old Testament" and "God of the New Testament" as if there were 2 human kings, one evil and the other good. With the Incarnation, God's Word was focused in a person, and so in a way easier for us to understand. But it's also easier for us to intellectualize, when our knowing of God is through words.
I think that ultimately. there is only the transcendent God, the unknowable creator. Things happen in the world; they always have. A relationship with God means that we see those things in a certain way. God calls constantly to His creation, but we only see the echo of that call in the words of finite humanity. The relationship God had with the ancient Israelites is reflected in the texts of the OT. Those words were written by people in a time and a place where what they could know about God was constrained by their culture and assumption, just as ours is. What we see in the text is a recounting of an interpretation of God in the world. I believe the Bible is Holy Scripture. I see it as a way of communicating with the transcendent God, but through our own humanity, flawed and beautiful.
(sorry for the sermon --not exactly an 'argument from reason' :/ )
Grace dances. I would pipe; dance, all of you...
Hymn of Jesus from 'The Acts of John'
Member of the Religious Tolerance Cabal of the Wardrobe